‘The aim: ““A safe road system increasingly free of death and serious injury”’
-Safer Journeys- New Zealand’s Road safety Strategy 2010-2020-
Discussion of Analysis
This research was based on the expectation that differences in the road-toll in various countries was primarily related to individual driver behavior, and the different policies different countries had that governed aspects of this behavior. It was therefore considered appropriate to try and evaluate road tolls measured against policies on alcohol, speed, and the education of young drivers, being three individual variables that have been shown to have a high correlation with the incidence of fatal traffic accidents. It was expected that this study would allow clear trends to be drawn between specific policies and road tolls in a range of different countries, and therefore allow clear policy recommendations for New Zealand to be drawn from these.
In contrast to these expectations, no clear trend was able to be drawn between differing road tolls between countries and any of the potential causal factors examined. Based on this research, there is no relationship between an individual country’s policies on any one of these factors and its respective road toll. This suggests that policy changes aimed directly at these variables are unlikely to have any effect on New Zealand’s road toll, and it is likely that other measures will have to be taken. These may include more effective policing of speed and alcohol limits, increased education of the general public of the risks, and addressing underlying social trends, such as binge drinking.
Research Limitations and Critique
This report has analysed differences in policy between different countries, in the assumption that these policies will match driver behaviour. In other words, it has been assumed that differences in policy explain differences in the road-toll between countries, and therefore a change in policy will be expected to result in changed driver behaviour, and consequently impact on the frequency and severity of road accidents. However the validity of this assumption may be challenged. In particular, societal factors may prove to be more important. For example, New Zealand is well known to have a binge-drinking problem, whereas in other countries, alcohol abuse is relatively infrequent. This could potentially confound the results, as it conceals any correlation between legal alcohol limit and fatal crash incidence. Societal influences such as these need to be taken into consideration both when conducting research and when designing and implementing policy.
This study excluded contextual factors from the analysis, due to the relative difficulty associated with measuring them, and the practical problems associated with implementing effective policies aimed at countering these factors. The results of this study suggest that such contextual factors should be considered in future studies of this nature. Useful comparisons to make could be the percentage of kilometers of road that is grade-separated, or has a median barrier separating oncoming traffic. However, while contextual variables may be important in increasing risk, it is individual driver’s perception and understanding of this risk, and ability to react appropriately, that is the prime determinant of whether a crash occurs.
Therefore, while this study was unable to draw any clear link between the overall incidence of fatal road accidents and national policies, the weight of evidence suggests that the variables considered in this study are important in determining the risk of an individual being involved in a road accident. Therefore this study should not be interpreted as evidence that policies addressing these issues should not be considered a priority by the New Zealand Government in attempting to prevent road deaths.